What do you mean by "compulsion'?  Odd word to use.

I've change it. Is Israel really has no other choice but only strengthen its military policy (what is connection with Israel's insecurity)?

So you mean it as external to them and not related to their own policy (example taking property from Arabs)?

As far as I remember Israel has excellent bilateral relations with Jordan. So you might want to rephrase the hypothesis a bit. 

On another hand, you might also want to consider the fact that Israel has a culture of militarisation, also due to the fact that domestic politics are controlled by former military and intelligence elites. Their role in the cultivation of such a political perspective is not at all minor. 

To some extent, the survival thesis, although articulated as a response to prior victimisation, was nevertheless conceptually overstretched in order to allow a behavioural dynamic that was not always congruent with the logic of self defense. Nevertheless, it is equally true that, should Israel have a less hegemonic position in its near abroad, its territoriality would be extremelly vulnerable.

However, Israel's policy of militarisation might be a response to a learned identity, rather than a rational calculus. Although, it is clear that the existent patterns of interactions with the Arab states, might have created an overarching sense of insecurity, the prominent cause for the policy does lie with the indigenous politicians.

I would suggest you an intriguingly interesting article from Haaretz:

http://www.haaretz.com/news/features/1.674030

Ms.Wolska, Your observation: "It is caused by experience and the fact that the country is surrounded on all sides by openly hostile countries that deny its right to exist." Is understated.

What a lot of people miss is that Israel as a State is not the problem, Israel as a Jewish State is. In class, I emphasize to my students to not just hear what people say, but to actually listen to what they say. Nothing better than letting a side explain their position personally.

I'll give you 3 of the examples I illustrate in class:

1) Ahlam Tamimi (Palestinian Hamas terrorist convicted for the 8/9/01 Sbarro Bombing). In a 2011 documentary interview, Tamimi emphasized that Al-Masri (the suicide bomber in the attack) was only interested that there were "religious Jews" in the restaurant (he wasn't interested in Israelis). She then clarified that the basis for the Palestinian/Israeli struggle is religion.      Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-WTx7k4baw

2) PA chairman Mahmoud Abbas. In a 10/23/2011 interview he states that (translated), "I will never recognize the Jewishness of the state or a 'Jewish state'." So...How exactly do you negotiate for peace when the leadership refuses to recognize your right to exist?          Link: http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/3163.htm

3) Question period at UCSD between the speaker David Horowitz and a MSA student at UCSD. Near the end, Mr.Horowitz quotes Hassan Nasrallah (Secretary-General of Hezbollah) who stated that he would prefer that all of the Jews would come to Israel so he would not have to hunt them down globally. Note the student's response.    Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fSvyv0urTE

Of course, Iran is directly assisting Hezbollah and Hamas. Numerous other States are also providing assistance (such as financial).

Historically, there are other notable signs, such as the Mufti of Jerusalem allied with Hitler in WW2 and helped supply the Nazis with Muslim troops - Their common ground was the declared goal of eradicating the Jews.AND this was before Israel was reinstated. I do have a whole lot more examples, but this post is getting rather long already.

So not only is your country targeted, but your faith is (regardless of country). 

When a large portion of the world population denies, ignores and/or ridicules the facts. Another large portion (Specifically Radical Islam) declares their intent on your extinction. What are your options?

About the only way to actually fix the problem with Israel is for all Jews and all Israeli citizens (Jews, Christians, etc) to stand up, renounce Judaism and convert to Islam. By the way, better warn the LGBT crowd, single women, etc. that their lifestyles are about to be permanently changed and/or revoked.

Or you can invest in being able to defend yourself.

Hi,

I would like to stick first to the facts. Israel is only one of the most militarized countries in the world. According to the World Bank statistics the percent of the military expenditures of the country's GDP was  5.2 between 2010-2014. In comparison to other countries, Oman-11.8 % of GDP , Saudi Arabia 10.8, Russian Federation 4.5, South Sudan 8.3, Lybia 8.0, UAR 5.7, and so on. The extent of the militarization of a country is a function of how much the country's existence  is threatened, and in this context  it is possible to understand Israel's militarization.  A much better question that should be asked is, how democracy and fine science can survive all these years under such threats ?

Hello Jessica,

Israel's strategic location means that it has very little 'strategic depth'. However, even if that were somehow not so, it would face the continual threat of attack by virtue of the fact of its dispossession of the original inhabitants. Israel's geopolitical location simply multiplies the dangers from this unavoidable reality exponentially. Israel will most definitely not continue to hold the line successfully against its external and internal enemies.

Hi, 

In response to the above White's comment, I have to say that the same was said almost 70 years ago.

Jessica, from the tone of your post you seem to be using the word 'militarised' almost as a term of abuse here, or certainly indicating that it is an undesireable situation which needs to be corrected - and I suspect that most people would agree take the same stance.  However, it is important to consider what you actually mean by it.  If a state has a strong military, with a close linkage between its military forces and its population, and perhaps its government bodies (retired or reservist military personnel in key government positions), is that necessarily a bad thing?  It is certainly not the western way of doing things, but is that the only norm against which we can make value judgements? I am not saying that you are wrong here, but I am questioning whether any state, not just Israel, must be criticized simply because it does not fit our western view of how its civil-military relations are organised. I would be interested in others' views. 

Jessica, the idea of militarism comples a deeper discussion because there are many definitions of militarism. Generally speaking we have to distinguish between three types of militarism: political militarism which means use of military force in order to resolve political probelms, cognitive militarism which concentrates on the conceptual systems in use in order to interpret and analyze reality and cultural militarism which relates to societal norms, ceremonies, symbols and language.

Which militarism do you refer to? Israel is a unique case that does not follow the classical Western patterns, as well as other democracies, like India for an example. I recommend you reading Rebecca Schiff's "concordance theory" in order to find out different types of civil-military relations. In order to deepen your knowledge regarding the Israeli militarism I recommend reading Moshe Lisak in the epilog chapter in Oren and Shefer's book about the Israeli Militarism, published by Indiana University Press.

With regard to the comment by one of the discussants about the presence of military elites among the political elite, it is worth mentioning that Itzhak Rabin, Moshe Dayan, Ehud Barak, Amnon Lipkin Shahak and others among senior Israeli politicians where statesmen who promoted peace agreements and acted against the military recommendations in different contexts although they came from the core of the military establishment.

Life is more complicated than general theories with all their importance.

Hi, 

The presence of military elites among political elites is not unique to Israel, General Wight David "Ike" Eisenhower was the 34th President of the United States from 1953 until 1961, Also, Colonel Teddy Roosevelt,  Lieutenant John F. Kennedy, and Captain Ronald Reagan.

I was not trying to negate the militarization of Israel. I've recently met with the opinion that Israel's militarization is a good thing, because it is the State threatened by e.g Iran. Iran in this context has been recognized as a "rogue state". It's hard to agree with this. Is Iran's action are also not the result of border security of the region and its interests? Why militarization of the one country has more priority tone?

Hi Jessica,

It is surprising that you compare defense needs of Iran with those of Israel. Have you looked at the geographical map recently ? Compared with the size of Iran Israel's size is that of a needle. Israel's population is about 10% of Iran's population. So, how it is possible to compare ? Besides, Israel's militarization is basically defensive, while it is a well known fact that Iran supports terrorists organizations around the world with money and arms.

I see three problems with that argument. First, there is a lack of conceptual clarity as to what is 'militarism'.  Using defece expenditure as a measure of militarism isn't common anymore as far as I know. Especially that as percentage of GDP the Israeli defence budget is far from its highest point. Also it has been decades since the Defence Industry was extensively supported by the state. Nowadays it is mostly export oriented and compete successfully as private-market companies. Most of the works on 'Israeli militarism' are focused rather on institutional, social and cultural aspects (e.g. Uri Ben-Eliezer, Baruch Kimmerling, Yagil Levy). There is a variety of approaches that are more alternative and competing with each other than complementary ones. However, none I think would make such a claim.

Second, Israel ISN'T surrounded  all sides by openly hostile countries". It has peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan that are perceived by the Ministry of Security, Israel Defense Forces, Mossad and Shabak as essential security partners. There are indications that it is mutual perception! To the West, the Mediterranean provides strategic depth through regional partnerships. In addition, as the Israeli society is highly fragmented many sectors are clearly non-militarized (e.g. Palestinian citizens of Israel, academia). Again, familiarity with the domestic literature (which is published mostly in English) is crucial.

Finally, and it was mentioned by another respondent, the interpretation of the strategic environment is a social process. In case of non-Realist study, and militarisation isn't a realist concept, one would have at least to refer to the vast constructivist literature.

One can not deny the fact that  Israel is compelled to militarize its society due to the hostile borders. But above mentioned argument that  the problem is the Jewishness of the state is not a unique reason. Rather it is one of the most apparent reason. one respondent  argues that problem should be seen through the lenses of constructivism , because the jewish society is fragmented. Of course, I do agree that basically Israel is a country  of migrants.But I would like to argue that the gap between the two major jewish communities ,i.e, Ashkenazim and Mizrahi  has  almost been settled. Because the second generation people of these communities almost have share in prestigious jobs, Gone are the days when Mizrahis were only given  blue colored jobs. Because in Israel who came first in mabaroot (transition camps) were given all the facilities and were accommodated in a constuctive way. Second exodus was that of Mizrahi who came from middle east. They were not provided opportunities , because at that time Israeli economy faced sluggish and stagnant growth. But now the differences has lost importance.That's why the sectarian parties like tami and shas party of Mizrahi  do not enjoy much support. 

Hence, the militarization of Israel can be justified by realist theory. Because statism , self help and survival are the very basic elements of realism. 

And for Israel her survival is the top most priority.

Hi,

I am amazed by Akshaya Saroha's knowledgeable explanation. Well done !

 Thank you& unfeigned regards @Avishag Gordon

militarization as I mentioned in my previous comment is a multi-dimensional concept. if we examine militarization as a percentage of the GDP, we see that during the last decade the percentage is getting lower and this year the security budget is less than 6% of the GDP, which means that priorities are in change and bigger percentage of the GDP goes to other societal needs. taking into consideration the challenges Israel faces it is not less than a miracle that the state of Israel became to be one of the leading states with regard to economy, technology, quality of life and most important a state where 87% of its population feel happy and satisfied in their life. 

Hello, I am a collaborator member of Instituto de la Paz y los Conflictos (Institute of Peace and Conflict, University of Granada, Spain).

I agree with many reasons exposed in this dialogue about the need to explain the concept "militarism", not only in terms of budget with also in state policies and social reality and perceptions.

As researchers we can't hide or neglect that the State of Israel occupies military the Palestinian territories, Gaza and the West Bank, against several UN resolutions, and this is also a very important –essential- part of its geopolitical situation. Maybe the gap between Ashkenazi and Mizrahi communities is almost settled, but the conflict inside Israel with Palestinian Israeli community and Palestinian in Gaza and West Bank, as I see it, is far from this, and both problems are connected as long as Human Rights in Palestinian territories are still violated. The tragical political, economical and social situation in this territories –the occupation- as you know has lead to the rising of armed groups as the military brigades of Hamas that naturally affect the perception of menace and encourage militarism and its social acceptance.

I agree with the remarks about surrounding menaces, Israel Isn’t  surrounded  all sides by openly hostile countries, because it has peace treaties with Jordan and Egypt. Buy we have to mention that political instability after Irak war and Arab popular revolutions, what was called “Arab spring” are factors of menace perceptions and may have an effect in militarism. We can’t neglect that the last 4 years there are current wars in Irak and Syria, that has caused 11,5 million people flee hunger and persecution in this part of the world, as everybody knows. These conditions had a great influence in militarism of a state and social acceptance of military policies, in my humble opinion.

Ms.Vidal-Luengo

Israel has been militarized for decades before the "Arab Spring".

Even with the treaties, Egypt is not stable and has an active Muslim Brotherhood presence (enough of one to have temporary control of the government with Pres. M.Morsi before he was removed). Jordan has a large anti-Israel presence in it's government.

Just for clarification, Israel doesn't occupy Gaza. It is under the Palestinian Authority (and Hamas), not Israeli control. Of course, it gives Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad a safe staging area to launch attacks against Israel (I provided some links on their intentions in an earlier post). Iran is supplying Hamas and the PIJ with weapons and munitions (and giving other logistical support).

I always found it useful to look into how a group/society teaches their children to help understand the society itself (all just this year):

1) Gaza-Hamas TV:       https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1UXlSeDHGh0

2) Gaza-PA TV:     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fKjUH8GTuk

3) West Bank-Kindergarten graduation:                                                      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scYlfEBXD4M

4) Gaza-Hamas Summer Camp:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfLgX4uDgzI

By the way, #4 is in direct violation of the UN charter on Human Rights.

When you say "Menace perceptions" it implies that the threat is not real. Unfortunately they are very real.

And if ISIS/ISIL isn't stopped the threat to Israel (as well as the "West") grows exponentially...especially if Syria falls to them.

I thought that  RG  was designed for science and research questions and not a stage for propaganda based on media reports. (reference to Vidal-Luengo piece).

Avishag, Although I agree with your recent observation, don't forget that the participants here are from a wide variety of locations with various backgrounds, educations, experiences, and influences. All of that combined will effect how we perceive different issues and points. 

The Israel/Palestinian issue has been so completely misrepresented out there. I am personally astounded with how bad it has become here in the US, especially on College Campuses (Thank you MSA, SJP, etc).

The part I find interesting here is being able to address and challenge (with facts and analysis) those perceptions with other professionals and hopefully everyone (myself included) can benefit with a little better understanding.

Dear colleagues, when I mentioned "menace perceptions" I didn't meant only subjective threats, it is a misunderstanding, sorry for my english.

In fact I was trying to underline that the facts say that there are armed conflicts in all this area, including Israel, and I didn't want to neglect, as used, that Hamas has armed brigades (I mentioned it!) and violent army and it is also necessary to work in the demilitarization of all the parts in the conflict (what is called scalade in Conflictology), a very violent conflict in Palestine/ Israel. But I am obliged to underline as a researcher that the facts say that Israel also violates many and more intensely UN resolutions and international law in this aspect. I don´t think that my affirmations are purely based on media reports, I think that researchers who don't agree because of their background, field of research, etc. simply have the obligation of exposing their knowledge influenced by their backgrounds and not to fall into discredit.

My humble point of view as an Spanish researcher in Arab and Islamic worldviews of peace and conflict and interested and researching in Palestine/Israel culture of nonviolence, who isn’t Arab nor Jew nor Israeli but emotionally attached to Jewish and Arabic cultures is that there is a lot of serious research about the reality / realities of this conflict.

Only for example on militarization in Israel, this excerpt from an article of 2009 by Bakan & Abu-Laban: “Palestinian resistance and international solidarity...”  in Race and class Vol. 51(1): 29-54, DOI: 10.1177/0306396809106162, about the Wall, an aspect of militarization in Israel:

"Construction began on 16 June 2002. Currently nearing completion,

it is expected to extend over 670 kilometres, consisting of a series of 25-foot

high concrete walls, barbed wire and electric fences, trenches, electronic sensors,

thermal imaging and video cameras, and unmanned aerial vehicles. The

building of the wall also includes a series of new roads for patrol vehicles and

towers equipped for armed Israeli snipers"

"Construction companies contracted to blast, dig and build sections of the wall

are surrounded by armed forces, often supplemented by private mercenaries

who stand with their fingers on the triggers of hand guns, as the armed units

seize Palestinian lands"  (p. 41)

Also only as an example, the International Institute for Nonviolent Action has published an inform on an aspect of militarization in Israel (and also in Spain, of course):

Defence, security and occupation as a business. Military, armaments and security trade relations between Spain and Israel  

http://novact.org/2014/02/defence-security-and-occupation-as-a-business-military-armaments-and-security-trade-relations-between-spain-and-israel/?lang=en

To return to the main question, I think these aspects have an obvious influence in the geopolitical situation of Israel and an effect in militarization, of course, not only of Israel but in all parts in this region. The question is, how is this conflict affecting all the geopolitical situation, and the answer is complex and requires interdisciplinary work.

About Gaza, technically was "disconnected", so "non occupied" but in the past it was occupied,  and after Disconnection Plan in 2005, remember 2009, 2012 and 2014 intense bombings: not occupied but military attacked, and with military blockade (land, air and sea).  It is and armed conflict that we have to consider in the geopolitical situation of Israel.

I hope this could help constructive discussion, thank you all for your contributions

Ms. Vidal-Luengo,

I understood your original post, as well as, your current post, you were and are very articulate and clear. I do believe that your interpretation is not looking at all of the facts though.

For example, you make references to the 2009, 2012, 2014 Israeli attacks on Gaza, but ignore that they were in response to Hamas & PIJ attacks on Israel coming from Gaza (rocket attacks), Hamas/PIJ tunneling into Israel to carry out attacks, etc.

The blockades are looking for weapons/munitions, not non-military items such as food, medicine, goods and such which are allowed to pass.

As for the UN, that body has constantly condemned Israel (Especially when they defend themselves) and just as constantly ignored and/or praised the Palestinians. And that's even though there is over-whelming evidence of Palestinian actions such as (and not limited to):

1) storing weapons/munitions and attacking Israel from UN buildings, schools, hospitals, & mosques,

2) Combat training juveniles

3) Targeting civilians and civilian areas.

4) Diverting UN funds to weapons, combat training, tunnels, etc.

The UN does not have any real credibility anymore (of course, not talking just about the Israel issue either).

It comes down to a simple question: When you have a large population (both historically and currently) sworn to eliminate you, not because of land/territory, but because of your Faith, what other option do you have but to be able to protect yourself?

By the way, I'm not, Arab, Israeli, Jew, Muslim, etc. I'm an American (born & raised) and sort of a Catholic. One of my specialties though, is terrorism (through training, education, and experience) which is why I am so interested in this particular area.

Although the evolving debate is interesting and illuminating of the current debates concerning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it is quite detached from the original question. Most of the cited work, even the academic ones, do not bear directly on the Israeli civil-military relations literature that study the issues of militarization. A good starting point to study these issues might be: Cohen, Stuart. Israel and its Army: From cohesion to confusion. London: Routledge, 2008.

I agree with Mr. Libel, the discussion is detached from question exposed (and Israel-Palestine conflict many times discuted in this way), but I only want to underline the importance of social sciences and interdisciplinarity in this kind of research, militarism as a policy related also with ideologies, as terrorism has to be analysed in its relations to religion, economy, violence and also peaceful or nonviolent instances...

I think Libel's article "Between military–society and religion–military relations: different aspects of the growing religiosity in the Israeli defense forces" is an example of research in this direction

Thank you all

Article Between military-society and religion-military relations: Di...

A nation which was attacked at time of her birth. A nation whose people went  to almost every door when they were being prosecuted in Nazi Germany. A nation whose people are having 1:44 enemy ratio , a nation which sends the large no. of doctors , rescue experts as and when tragedy occurs in the world, a nation which fight for its existence not for expansion, a nation that produce the large no. of naobel laurete , a nation which fight against all odds shall not be subjected to biasness and have every reason to defend its people and territory. I am not trying to make a point that Palestinians do no have right to live rather they  have every human right but I am trying to say Israel also have right to survive with co-existence .

co- existence should become the guiding principle if we want to see peace in the reason. Mechanisms should be inducted that would guide peace.

Hות

I am following Akshaya Saroha's words about co-existence.  I live in Haifa, a city of peaceful friendly co-existence between Jews and Arabs (Mus elms and Christians), between secular and religious parts of the city,. There are mixed businesses of Jews and Arabs, and growing percents of Arab students in the Israeli higher education institutes. There are Israeli Arabs/Palestinians in high positions in research institutes, hospitals etc.  These facts are usually overlooked by the international media and its consumers.

The available figures about representation of Palestinian citizens of Israel in the public sector, higher education/research sector, health sector and most others. The government admittedly do not meet its own highly limited targets. In most aspects 20% of the Israeli society are highly marginalized. 

but there is a continuing improvements in this regard. in some domains' like the medical domain, the representation of the Israeli Arabs is even higher than their percentage in the population. their quality of life is in a progress, although there is a lot to do yet. it is worth reading Sami Samocha surveys about the Arab citizens' approach to the state of Israel and their sense of belonging, almost 50% of them are even willing to accept the state of israel as the nation state of the Jewish people. much more describe themselves as proud of being Israelis. so although discrimination is not over yet, there are some major positive trends to be taken into account.

The high representation of Palestinian citizens of Israel at the health sector is at least partially due to their marginalization in most other places. Even there, their number in managerial echelons would be minimal. Law firms, accounting firms, universities and most other work places just don't hire Arabs, except as token. 

As the social alienation of Jewish citizens of Israel toward Arab and Arabic culture is increasing consistently, hardly Arab municipality is authorized to issue construction permits, Arab school curriculum is supervised by the security authorities I doubt that there is 'continuous improvement'. The fact that most Israelis refuse to use the preferred definition by the group-Palestinians citizens of Israel-is an indication.

Hi,

I have to refer to Tamir's  comment as baseless information. It is information based on artificial cries for equality of rights by the Israeli Arab/Palestinians in Israel, where affirmative action already exists in many institutions. For instance, the high percent of Israeli/Arab doctors in hospitals, the high percent f Israeli/Arab pharmacists in pharmacies, Their presence in Cellular companies and cable television companies, and the growing share of Israeli Arab/Palestinians students in Israeli universities.

I am not sure what are Libel's information sources, but I certainly recommend learning more about the actual state of affairs in Israel on this issue .

The reasons can be attached to multitudinal factors which include:

1) The belligerent nature of the Israeli Prime Minister

2) Boiling tensions of  Zionism, Israeli hard approach on terrorism,  the Palestinian Nationalism and anti-semitism.

3)  Israel certainly suspects that the expansion of settlements will attract violent resistance.

4) The use of Military threat as deterrence